Title
Guerrero vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 137004
Decision Date
Jul 26, 2000
Petition challenging COMELEC's dismissal of disqualification case against Fariñas; SC upheld HRET's exclusive jurisdiction post-election.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 137004)

Procedural Background

The petition before the Court contests the Orders and Resolution issued by the COMELEC regarding Guillermo C. Ruiz's attempt to disqualify Rodolfo C. FariAas as a candidate for Congress. Ruiz's initial petition alleged that FariAas campaigned without a filed Certificate of Candidacy in violation of the Omnibus Election Code and requested that FariAas be declared a "nuisance candidate." FariAas subsequently filed a Certificate of Candidacy on May 8, 1998, and was later proclaimed the winner of the elections.

Issues Raised by the Petitioner

After the elections, Ruiz filed a motion for reconsideration and argued that FariAas's candidacy was invalid due to the alleged inapplicability of the substitution provision under the Omnibus Election Code, as the original candidate was an independent and not an official party candidate. Guerrero also interjected by claiming that he had been the legitimate candidate of the Liberal Party and sought the disqualification of FariAas.

Feeing of Jurisdiction: COMELEC vs. HRET

Following the elections, the COMELEC En Banc dismissed the motions, asserting that with FariAas's assumption of office, its jurisdiction had lapsed and any contest about his qualifications should be addressed by the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). This decision sparked the main contention regarding whether the COMELEC had indeed lost the jurisdiction to resolve the validity of the certificate of candidacy upon the winning candidate's proclamation and assumption of office.

Constitutional Framework

The controlling law in this decision stems from the 1987 Philippine Constitution, specifically Article VI, Section 17, which grants exclusive jurisdiction over election contests related to the qualifications and returns of members of the House of Representatives to the HRET.

Analysis of COMELEC’s Authority

The Court concluded that the COMELEC's decision to refrain from exercising jurisdiction over the case was warranted, recognizing the boundaries established by the Constitution between the powers of the COMELEC and the HRET. The Court indicated that the act of taking the oath of office subsequently removed the case from the purview of the COMELEC, thereby transferring jurisdiction to the HRET for the resolution of election-related disputes.

Petitioner’s Arguments Dismissed

Petitioner Guerrero's assertion that the HRET's jurisdiction is limited to constitutional qualifications was deemed unpersuasive. The Court clarifie

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.